Most of the poor energy footprint is not optional: commuting (most can't live in expensive districts), heating a single small apartment, basic food, buy a few l

Most of the poor energy footprint is not optional: commuting (most can't live in expensive districts), heating a single small apartment, basic food, buy a few leisure things. Almost all the wealthy footprint is discretionary: air travel, luxury purchase, package holidays... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-0579-8 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-0579-8 Your "statistical anomaly" is not anecdotal, it's the very symbol of a broken system that was designed not to care. In this situation, I cannot expect the non-wealthy to make big efforts to reduce their consumption while the ultra rich continues to casually destroy the environment. We're letting the rich take almost all the profit but we ask the poor to work harder only because they're more numerous. This can only end with violence or a catastrophe, IMHO.